-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
AMD Polaris architecture – GCN 4.0
- Thread starter Boomstick777
- Start date
Polaris is not targeting those who already have a GTX 970 or R9 390, it's targeting those with a 750Ti, 260, 270X or even iGPUs, who wish to upgrade to 970/390 levels of performance at a budget. If you look at the same steam survey you are referring to, you'll find that the percentage of users with those types of cards is way higher than the current mid/high end cards combined.
The feigning surprise that it doesn't perform like a 1070 and "AMDoooooomed" posts because a £200-250 card isn't as fast as a £400 one are entirely cynical and obvious in their intent. Clearly if you had the budget to spend on a 1070 at the drop of an unconfirmed benchmark, the 480 was never aimed at you in the first place.
From the posts in these forums I was actually believing that it would be a bit competitive with the 1070 but doesn't look like it. Who really wants last years mid range for £230 when you can buy something that smashes it for £140 more? Vega isn't going to be cheap if the 480 is £200+ for 390 performance. Everyone's so defensive I just had my hopes up thats all and its not like every AMD fan on this forum wasn't expecting a bit more read the posts in these forums, I mean some people were in denial that this was the fat Polaris chip and they had a 490 up there sleeve lol
Last edited:
You have no-one but yourself to blame for being disappointed if you genuinely thought that the 480 was going to compete with a card that costs nearly twice as much. I'm not sure even the most delusional of AMD fanboys expected that once the price was announced. AMD aren't a charity.
And £140 is a lot of money for a lot of people. In fact, most people either can't or won't spend nearly £400 on a graphics card. Sales have always reflected that. Perhaps you're rich enough to the point where you can dismiss £140 as nothing, but if so why stop at the 1070? Just another £140 and you can have a 1080...
They do have a 490 (or whatever it's going to be called) up their sleeve. It's called Vega and it's not ready yet. Anybody who was expecting it to be Polaris and released alongside these cards was delusional, not optimistic. I feel like AMD have been very clear on what their strategy is. If a few stupid people want to speculate themselves into a frenzy and then deal with crushing disappointment when their wild fantasies don't materialise, that's their problem.
Last edited:
I'll admit I got dragged into the hype just like most others if you read the posts on this forum I am not alone by a long stretch. I am by no means rich but theres this thing called saving and thats what I plan on doing
Everytime AMD say something the performance is reduced, in 24 hours its gone from being faster than a 390X to slower than a 390.
Its turning into yet another bad joke.
At £250 its starting to look rather expensive and unattractive.
It is starting to look like that
I'm hoping when game reviews come in however the improvements over GCN 3 show though and its becomes a great performer for the price
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Dear lord, there is nothing to suggest it's £250, and nothing in that suggests what the performance of the RX 480 is, 480M results are 35W... the 480M will be Polaris 11.
Early retailers putting up stupid prices are usually wrong. This won't be price gouged because stock will be high, $239 in £ + 20% vat is absolutely no where near £250.
Last edited:
$100 extra is a hell of lot to pay for custom cooling on a $200 card.
We've already seen 480 prices in the UK at £255 from a high street retailer that isn't going price gouge, although their prices will never be competitive with online offers they don't inflate prices artifcially. No need to be surprised, AMD even said the Polaris GPUs will be priced up to $300 =£252. one just has to hope the custom ones come with a significant overclock.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 May 2007
- Posts
- 10,207
It depends on the boost you get. The 480 may be clocked low and the customer cooled cards could offer 20% on top like with some Maxwell cards. Just need to wait and see.
Nice one.
I notice in the endnotes, AMD list some interesting figures, like 110w board power for the RX470 and their 2.8x performance/watt figures are from a RX470 compared to a 270X (that is a GCN 1.0 Pitcairn GPU for those that didn't know). there are some benchmark scores as well.
Yeah, exactly this. I get the feeling that will be the case, if so it will be a RX 480 for me, if not 1070 it will have to be
Nice one.
I notice in the endnotes, AMD list some interesting figures, like 110w board power for the RX470 and their 2.8x performance/watt figures are from a RX470 compared to a 270X (that is a GCN 1.0 Pitcairn GPU for those that didn't know). there are some benchmark scores as well.
Nice find. So 2.8x efficiency compared to GCN1. Well, I guess I was wrong because I assumed a chunk of that was for VR performance due to single pass multi-projection. This will mean performance efficiency compared to Fiji will be quite a lot less.
Given the above and the lack luster VR scores I do wonder if AMD have anybVR specific hardware. Would be quite ironic if only pascal saw significant VR improvements.
The 270X was actually AMDs most power efficient (non-HBM) card from 28nm.
If it genuinely is 2.8x the perf/W, that puts it at ~1.2x Pascal's perf/W.
The figures AMD are putting out make no sense. If the RX 480 really is only around 970/390 performance, it must only consume 80-85W in typical gaming?
I just want proper benchmarks...
Last edited:
Well, they are talking about board power, not power consumption, as usual its incredibly vague and not really saying much at all, certainly nothing that actually pins down how much power they use.
the 270X for example, which they cite as having a "board power of 180 Watts" uses 120 to 150 Watts depending on where you look.
Last edited: